Earth Science Forum Governance

This and that

And yet you keep coming back to this "shithole".

I have noticed, over the years, a correlation between people who show your brand of anger at the moderation of this "shithole" and exceptionally dubious interpretation.

Indeed, it is self-evident that the statement that there is no such thing as "sick" is unsubstantiated.

Look, as a general rule, I assign certain necessary obligations of communication to the broadcasting party. History provides us with numerous examples, perhaps my favorite of which is the Requerimiento, in which Spanish explorers read a brutal order to submit to European rule to indigenous American tribes. Trouble broke out, of course, when the tribes did not immediately comply. Centuries later, nobody has ever adequately explained why the Spanish thought these tribes, which they had never met before, would understand spoken Latin.

Of course, when they finally figured that part out and had locals read the order in vernacular, the tribes didn't just go about their business, but got rather quite pissed off about the whole thing. Or, as historian Stephen Ambrose put it, in one or another tome, "Poor Coronado!"

There is, however, a factor to consider when receiving parties refuse communication. In your case—

"In order to meet the standard of proof required by sciforums, you simply need to state that 'evidence is available', or that the claim 'substantiates itself'.​

—I am not surpried at your failure to understand very basic communication; it is part of your method. Nor am I suprised that your interpretation is exactly what you need to pitch a hissy-cow; that, too, is a consistent and recognizable part of your method.

In terms of bringing your bullshit to EM&J, I would simply remind that there are, indeed, standards of conduct at Sciforums, and one of the reasons you find so little sympathy among moderators is that accurately describing your conduct and the integrity of the character you play here actually violates those rules. Which is why we chuckle and let you have a few tantrums under whatever new name you invent, and eventually toss your ass back out the door. At some point, we figure to just keep letting you embarrass yourself, because it does no good to suspend or expel you from this community—you just don't seem to get the point. It may be against the rules for people to be honest with you, because that honesty might seem insulting to your overblown ego, Mordea, but at the same time, you're not earning yourself any respect by adhering to these moronic methods solely intended to insult people's intelligence. Understand, please, though many are prone to say things like, "People are stupid," it is hard to believe that you are, as a person, actually as ignorant and clownish as the character you play here.

Else you might just be the missing piece of evidence needed to prove Darwin wrong.

• • •​

A note to Qwerty

Nobody cares, sir. Let it go, as I'm pretty sure at this point, you don't want us to care about your complaint.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Admin, please review the evidence that the thread originally titled 'Time for climate change deniers to get real' was inappropriately changed as revenge, and that sections of that thread were also inappropriately moved, renamed, and attributed to me on false pretenses.

As I have stated previously, a satisfactory resolution to this grievance would be to recombine the threads Time for AGW deniers/doubters/skeptics to get real and "The Politics, Language, and the Language of the Politics of AGW", and restore James' original Thread Title ('Time for climate change deniers to get real'); it is the right course of action given the evidence that the threads are pertinent and cohesive and that the thesis of much debate was contingent upon the original TT, and a point directly relative to Ben Cubby's quoted article. One might also weigh what has happened since.

If no one cared, I wouldn't be the subject of escalating maltreatment; nor anyone else.

Thank you

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Concerns addressed privately, and withholding further personal comments on this incident.

 

i think you should eventually post whatever resolutions reached in these "private" discussions in this thread.

if it is locked, open another one.
y'know, keep the community apprised and whatnot

 

/chuckle


The Politics, Language, and the Language of the Politics of AGW

hey qwerty
i am curious
how many infractions/warnings have you got in your 7 years here?
a record should be in your control panel
if you rather not say.......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

One infraction from "lightgigantic" several years ago... which I suppose I deserved, but nothing else, Gustav.

 

Digging through history ....

Man, I must be getting old. I had forgotten LG was ever a moderator. Hell, I still don't remember that adventure. When was it? I don't think he ever even posted in the Mod Lounge during his tenure.

However, for the record, I can track, say, Gustav's infraction and warning record back to December, 2006—approximately 37 or so citations. Yours, Qwerty, is absolutely blank.

 

/proud

tiassa
how about that spookz fella?
can we add his tally to mine?

 

Concrete shoes

Oh, shit. That's right. Um ....

Well, actually, that was before the infraction system. As I recall, it was late 2006 when we started with it. Spookz got his concrete shoes in August, 2004.

So that tally equals zero.

(Coincidentally, thirty-seven is the age I reach next week.)